So, putting aside that Jill Stein and Gary Johnson are most certainly not “noted for being racist, sexist, homophobic demagogues” (you forgot to mention that you were mistaken in asserting that), the idea that everyone who voted for Ralph Nader in 2000 “got us into Iraq and Afghanistan in the first place” is highly questionable.

Certainly the people who were not in swing states who voted for Nader had nothing to do with the actions of the Bush administration. And it can reasonably be argued that even the folks in Florida who voted for Nader are less responsible for invading Iraq and Afghanistan (not to mention the Patriot Act) than all the leading Democrats who supported those actions.

I’m not a Democrat. I’ve consistently criticized Obama, since before his first election. The alternatives are vastly worse for those of us who don’t enjoy the triple crown of privilege of being white, male and heterosexual.

There is no viable candidate who would be less violent than President Obama. And they would also fight vigorously against rights for women, LGBT people and non-white people. You keep pretending that voting for Roseanne is a viable strategy. It isn’t.

Your dream candidates are never, ever, ever, ever, ever going to win. So you’ll end up putting a right-wing Republican in office, and you can feel smug and satisfied knowing that you appeased your conscience while those of us who live as second class citizens see our quest for human rights bulldozed.

You persistently base your arguments on the deceit that anyone who could possibly win an election would have been better on any of those other issues. It’s disingenuous. We would have had murder from the sky and a roll-back of rights for people who don’t enjoy your cocoon of privilege.

Why don’t you try whingeing about the “cocoon of privilege” – a concept which you seem to think is a 100 percent guaranteed Acme Industries Argument Quasher – to people whose race, gender, and orientation, you, like, actually know?

You seem to think that the purpose of an election and our votes would be to elect a winner. Some of us think otherwise. Some of us think our vote is best used to express the direction and values we believe represent a better view of what we can do as a nation. We choose not to add the the tally of the masses but instead to express our individual choice.
You seem to think that your vote is best applied to one of the pre-determined ‘winners’, and you call what we do throwing our vote away. I submit that it is you sir who is throwing their vote away.

Except when I say it to pass some sort of creepy discussion-forum apartheid screening in which a moderator has determined that certain opinions are apparently only validly expressable by those with a particular DNA configuration.

I’ve criticized President Obama many times on that issue. And he reads comments at BB. The alternative was Mitt Romney. He would have been no better on military issues and much worse on social issues. When you have the same lack of legal equality as me, then we can talk as equals.

As it stands, I’m a second class citizen. I reserve the right to consider that in my voting choices. You can continue your gormless strategy to put more right wing Republicans in government.

“Once again, you skate on privilege. Do you belong to a demographic that doesn’t enjoy equal rights before the law?”
That old trope of yours again Antinous? Do you filter the entire world through your social/race divisionist goggles or just BB?
Here’s where I come from. My family comes from slaves. We were not welcome in public spaces. We had genocide committed on us. And we still suffer bigotry and hatred.
That does not change the fact that I believe in voting for who I think best reflects my views. Despite your noise and bluster to the contrary, you seem to support the establishment.
Your vote ‘against’ the republicans was a wasted vote. The current democratic regime is the most conservative, right wing, secretive government we’ve had in a very long time. Clearly, that’s what you support.
Your entire “skating on privilege” view is reductionist, dismissive, and is divisive sophistry of the worst kind.

Sounds as if you are hoping that Obama will stand tall on the LGBT issues.

He’s already done more than all previous presidents put together on that score. Which was completely unexpected. I thought that he’d be reticent on those issues and maybe get us out of the bombing wedding parties industry. At least he did something meaningful. Romney would have plowed us under while fapping to Gitmo torture videos.